DOCSLIB.ORG

TWO-ORBIT CONVEX POLYTOPES and TILINGS 11 Essentially by Coloring the Facets Depending Whether They Were Formed Inside a Facet, Or at a Missing Vertex, of the 4-Cube

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TWO-ORBIT CONVEX POLYTOPES and TILINGS 11 Essentially by Coloring the Facets Depending Whether They Were Formed Inside a Facet, Or at a Missing Vertex, of the 4-Cube TWO-ORBIT CONVEX POLYTOPES AND TILINGS KOLYA MATTEO Abstract. We classify the convex polytopes whose symmetry groups have two orbits on the flags. These exist only in two or three dimensions, and the only ones whose combinatorial automorphism group is also two- orbit are the cuboctahedron, the icosidodecahedron, and their duals. The combinatorially regular two-orbit convex polytopes are certain 2n- gons for each n ≥ 2. We also classify the face-to-face tilings of Euclidean space by convex polytopes whose symmetry groups have two flag orbits. There are finitely many families, tiling one, two, or three dimensions. The only such tilings which are also combinatorially two-orbit are the trihexagonal plane tiling, the rhombille plane tiling, the tetrahedral- octahedral honeycomb, and the rhombic dodecahedral honeycomb. 1. Introduction Here we will classify all convex polytopes, and face-to-face tilings of Eu- clidean space by convex polytopes, whose flags have two orbits under the action of the symmetry group. First we briefly define these terms. A convex polytope is the convex hull of a finite set of points in d-dimensional Euclidean space Ed [13]. In this paper we use “d-polytope” to mean “d- dimensional convex polytope,” “polygon” to mean “2-polytope” and “poly- hedron” to mean “3-polytope.” A face of a convex polytope P is the inter- section of P with a supporting hyperplane of P , i.e. a hyperplane H such that P is contained in one closed half-space determined by H, and such that H and P have non-empty intersection. We also admit the empty set and P itself as “improper” faces. A face is called j-dimensional, or a j-face, if its affine hull is j-dimensional; the empty face is (−1)-dimensional. The 0-faces arXiv:1403.2125v1 [math.MG] 10 Mar 2014 are also called vertices; 1-faces are also called edges; (d − 2)-faces may be called ridges and (d − 1)-faces are called facets. The faces of P , ordered by containment, form a lattice L(P ), the face lattice of P . The symmetry group of P , denoted G(P ), is the set of Euclidean isometries which carry P to itself. The automorphism group of P , denoted Γ(P ), is the set of lattice isomorphisms from L(P ) to itself. Since each transformation in G(P ) acts as an automorphism of L(P ), we can consider G(P ) as a subgroup of Γ(P ). Date: September 17, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 52B15; Secondary 51M20, 51F15, 52C22. Key words and phrases. Two-orbit, convex polytopes, tilings, half-regular, quasiregular. 1 2 MATTEO A maximal chain in L(P ) (i.e. a maximal linearly ordered set of faces) is called a flag (due to the way a vertex, followed by an edge incident to that vertex, followed by a 2-face incident to the edge, resemble the construction of a flagpole.) The set of all flags of P is F(P ). Transformations in G(P ) (or automorphisms in Γ(P )) induce an action on F(P ) in an obvious way. The orbits of flags under the action of G(P ) are called flag orbits, and a polytope with n distinct flag orbits is called an n-orbit polytope. Similarly, orbits of flags under the action of Γ(P ) are called combinatorial flag orbits, and a polytope with n such orbits is called combinatorially n-orbit; in the context of abstract polytopes, this is the only definition possible and the adjectives may be dropped. In [4, p. 273], Conway et al. introduce the term flag rank for the number of flag orbits. A k-orbit polytope is said to have a flag rank of k, and they 1 also suggest that such a polytope be called k -regular. Thus, in this paper we determine all the half-regular convex polytopes. One-orbit polytopes are the regular polytopes. It is well known [8] that there are infinitely many regular polygons, namely the regular n-gon for each n ≥ 3; there are five regular polyhedra, the Platonic solids; there are six regular 4-polytopes; and there are three regular d-polytopes for all d> 4. As far as flags are concerned, two-orbit polytopes are as close to regular as possible while not being regular. Two-orbit convex polytopes can either be combinatorially two-orbit, if G(P )=Γ(P ), or combinatorially regular, in which case G(P ) is a subgroup of index 2 in Γ(P ). In the more general case of abstract polytopes, combinatorially two-orbit polyhedra were examined by Hubard [18]. The chiral polytopes are notable examples of two-orbit abstract polytopes [26]. However, convex polytopes cannot be chiral [26, p. 496]. Figure 1. The first few two-orbit convex polygons, in pairs of duals As we shall show, two-orbit convex polytopes turn out to be even scarcer than one-orbit convex polytopes, and exist only in two or three dimensions. TWO-ORBITCONVEXPOLYTOPESANDTILINGS 3 There are infinitely many in two dimensions. For each n ≥ 2, a two-orbit 2n- gon may be constructed by alternating edges of two distinct lengths, with the same angle at each vertex (namely the interior angle of a regular 2n- n−2 gon, n π). Dual to each of these is another type of two-orbit 2n-gon, with uniform edge lengths, but alternating angle measures. In three dimensions, there are just four: The cuboctahedron, its dual the rhombic dodecahedron, the icosidodecahedron, and its dual the rhombic triacontahedron. We summarize the results in Theorems 1 and 2. Theorem 1. There are no two-orbit d-polytopes if d ≥ 4 (or if d ≤ 1). There are exactly four, if d = 3: the cuboctahedron, icosidodecahedron, rhombic do- decahedron, and rhombic triacontahedron. If d = 2, there are two infinite series of 2n-gons, for each n ≥ 2. Polygons of one series alternate between two distinct edge lengths. Polygons of the other alternate between two dis- tinct angle measures. Cuboctahedron Icosidodecahedron Rhombic Dodecahedron Rhombic Triacontahedron Figure 2. The two-orbit convex polyhedra In Section 6 we classify all two-orbit tilings by convex polytopes. We con- sider only face-to-face, locally finite tilings. See Section 6 for a description of each of the named tilings. 4 MATTEO Theorem 2. There are no two-orbit tilings of Ed if d ≥ 4 (or if d = 0). If d = 1, there is one family: an apeirogon alternating between two distinct edge lengths. If d = 2, there are four: the trihexagonal tiling (3.6.3.6); its dual, the rhombille tiling; a family of tilings by translations of a rhombus; and a family of tilings by rectangles. If d = 3, there are two: the tetrahedral- octahedral honeycomb and its dual, the rhombic dodecahedral honeycomb. In the above two theorems, all those examples which vary by a real pa- rameter greater than one (both types of 2n-gons, the apeirogon, and the tilings by rhombi and rectangles) are combinatorially regular; in each case, allowing the parameter to become one yields a regular polygon or tiling, to which all other members of the family are isomorphic. The other examples, namely the four polyhedra, the trihexagonal tiling, the rhombille tiling, the tetrahedral-octahedral honeycomb, and the rhombic dodecahedral honey- comb, are all unique (up to similarity), and are all combinatorially two-orbit. 2. Preliminary Facts Let P be a d-polytope. Recall that flags are maximal chains of faces of P . Two flags are said to be adjacent if they differ in exactly one face; if they differ in the j-face, they are said to be j-adjacent. The face lattice L(P ) satisfies the following four properties, which are in fact taken to be the definition of an abstract polytope of rank d [22, p. 22]: (P1) There is a least face F−1, the empty face, and a greatest face Fd, which is P itself. (P2) Every flag contains d + 2 faces. (P3) (Strong flag-connectivity:) For any two flags Φ and Ψ of P , there exists a sequence of flags Φ =: Φ0, Φ1,..., Φk := Ψ, such that each flag is adjacent to its neighbors and Φ ∩ Ψ ⊆ Φi for each i. (P4) (The diamond condition:) For any j, 1 ≤ j ≤ d, any j-face G of P , and any (j − 2)-face F contained in G, there are exactly two faces H such that F<H<G. A d-polytope Q is said to be dual to P if the face lattice L(Q) is anti- isomorphic to the lattice L(P ), that is, identical to L(P ) with the order reversed. A bijective, order-reversing function h: L(P ) → L(Q) is called a duality. A dual polytope to P is often denoted P ∗. Clearly, any two duals of P are combinatorially isomorphic. A dual P ∗ to any convex polytope P may be constructed by the process of polar reciprocation: After translating P , if ∗ necessary, so that the origin is contained in its interior, let P = Ty∈P { x | hx,yi ≤ 1 }, where hx,yi is the scalar product. Then (P ∗)∗ = P and G(P ∗)= G(P ). Thus, when necessary, we may assume that a polytope and its dual have the same symmetry group. For any two faces F and G of P with F ≤ G, G/F denotes the section of L(P ) whose face lattice is { H ∈L(P ) | F ≤ H ≤ G }. This section may be realized as a convex polytope by taking the dual polytope G∗ to G, say TWO-ORBITCONVEXPOLYTOPESANDTILINGS 5 with a duality h: G → G∗; then the dual h(F )∗ to the face h(F ) of G∗ is the desired polytope.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phase Behavior of a Family of Truncated Hard Cubes Anjan P
    THE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS 142, 054904 (2015) Phase behavior of a family of truncated hard cubes Anjan P. Gantapara,1,a) Joost de Graaf,2 René van Roij,3 and Marjolein Dijkstra1,b) 1Soft Condensed Matter, Debye Institute for Nanomaterials Science, Utrecht University, Princetonplein 5, 3584 CC Utrecht, The Netherlands 2Institute for Computational Physics, Universität Stuttgart, Allmandring 3, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany 3Institute for Theoretical Physics, Utrecht University, Leuvenlaan 4, 3584 CE Utrecht, The Netherlands (Received 8 December 2014; accepted 5 January 2015; published online 5 February 2015; corrected 9 February 2015) In continuation of our work in Gantapara et al., [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 015501 (2013)], we inves- tigate here the thermodynamic phase behavior of a family of truncated hard cubes, for which the shape evolves smoothly from a cube via a cuboctahedron to an octahedron. We used Monte Carlo simulations and free-energy calculations to establish the full phase diagram. This phase diagram exhibits a remarkable richness in crystal and mesophase structures, depending sensitively on the precise particle shape. In addition, we examined in detail the nature of the plastic crystal (rotator) phases that appear for intermediate densities and levels of truncation. Our results allow us to probe the relation between phase behavior and building-block shape and to further the understanding of rotator phases. Furthermore, the phase diagram presented here should prove instrumental for guiding future experimental studies on similarly shaped nanoparticles and the creation of new materials. C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4906753] I. INTRODUCTION pressures, i.e., at densities below close packing.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstract Regular Polytopes
    ENCYCLOPEDIA OF MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Abstract Regular Polytopes PETER MMULLEN University College London EGON SCHULTE Northeastern University PUBLISHED BY THE PRESS SYNDICATE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarc´on 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org c Peter McMullen and Egon Schulte 2002 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2002 Printed in the United States of America Typeface Times New Roman 10/12.5 pt. System LATEX2ε [] A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data McMullen, Peter, 1955– Abstract regular polytopes / Peter McMullen, Egon Schulte. p. cm. – (Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-521-81496-0 1. Polytopes. I. Schulte, Egon, 1955– II. Title. III. Series. QA691 .M395 2002 516.35 – dc21 2002017391 ISBN 0 521 81496 0 hardback Contents Preface page xiii 1 Classical Regular Polytopes 1 1A The Historical Background 1 1B Regular Convex Polytopes 7 1C Extensions
    [Show full text]
  • Smooth & Fractal Polyhedra Ergun Akleman, Paul Edmundson And
    Smooth & Fractal Polyhedra Ergun Akleman, Paul Edmundson and Ozan Ozener Visualization Sciences Program, Department of Architecture, 216 Langford Center, College Station, Texas 77843-3137, USA. email: [email protected]. Abstract In this paper, we present a new class of semi-regular polyhedra. All the faces of these polyhedra are bounded by smooth (quadratic B-spline) curves and the face boundaries are C1 discontinues every- where. These semi-regular polyhedral shapes are limit surfaces of a simple vertex truncation subdivision scheme. We obtain an approximation of these smooth fractal polyhedra by iteratively applying a new vertex truncation scheme to an initial manifold mesh. Our vertex truncation scheme is based on Chaikin’s construction. If the initial manifold mesh is a polyhedra only with planar faces and 3-valence vertices, in each iteration we construct polyhedral meshes in which all faces are planar and every vertex is 3-valence, 1 Introduction One of the most exciting aspects of shape modeling and sculpting is the development of new algorithms and methods to create unusual, interesting and aesthetically pleasing shapes. Recent advances in computer graphics, shape modeling and mathematics help the imagination of contemporary mathematicians, artists and architects to design new and unusual 3D forms [11]. In this paper, we present such a unusual class of semi-regular polyhedra that are contradictorily interesting, i.e. they are smooth but yet C1 discontinuous. To create these shapes we apply a polyhedral truncation algorithm based on Chaikin’s scheme to any initial manifold mesh. Figure 1 shows two shapes that are created by using our approach.
    [Show full text]
  • JMM 2017 Student Poster Session Abstract Book
    Abstracts for the MAA Undergraduate Poster Session Atlanta, GA January 6, 2017 Organized by Eric Ruggieri College of the Holy Cross and Chasen Smith Georgia Southern University Organized by the MAA Committee on Undergraduate Student Activities and Chapters and CUPM Subcommittee on Research by Undergraduates Dear Students, Advisors, Judges and Colleagues, If you look around today you will see over 300 posters and nearly 500 student presenters, representing a wide array of mathematical topics and ideas. These posters showcase the vibrant research being conducted as part of summer programs and during the academic year at colleges and universities from across the United States and beyond. It is so rewarding to see this session, which offers such a great opportunity for interaction between students and professional mathematicians, continue to grow. The judges you see here today are professional mathematicians from institutions around the world. They are advisors, colleagues, new Ph.D.s, and administrators. We have acknowledged many of them in this booklet; however, many judges here volunteered on site. Their support is vital to the success of the session and we thank them. We are supported financially by Tudor Investments and Two Sigma. We are also helped by the mem- bers of the Committee on Undergraduate Student Activities and Chapters (CUSAC) in some way or other. They are: Dora C. Ahmadi; Jennifer Bergner; Benjamin Galluzzo; Kristina Cole Garrett; TJ Hitchman; Cynthia Huffman; Aihua Li; Sara Louise Malec; Lisa Marano; May Mei; Stacy Ann Muir; Andy Nieder- maier; Pamela A. Richardson; Jennifer Schaefer; Peri Shereen; Eve Torrence; Violetta Vasilevska; Gerard A.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Lifts of Polytopes
    Lecture 5: Lifts of polytopes and non-negative rank CSE 599S: Entropy optimality, Winter 2016 Instructor: James R. Lee Last updated: January 24, 2016 1 Lifts of polytopes 1.1 Polytopes and inequalities Recall that the convex hull of a subset X n is defined by ⊆ conv X λx + 1 λ x0 : x; x0 X; λ 0; 1 : ( ) f ( − ) 2 2 [ ]g A d-dimensional convex polytope P d is the convex hull of a finite set of points in d: ⊆ P conv x1;:::; xk (f g) d for some x1;:::; xk . 2 Every polytope has a dual representation: It is a closed and bounded set defined by a family of linear inequalities P x d : Ax 6 b f 2 g for some matrix A m d. 2 × Let us define a measure of complexity for P: Define γ P to be the smallest number m such that for some C s d ; y s ; A m d ; b m, we have ( ) 2 × 2 2 × 2 P x d : Cx y and Ax 6 b : f 2 g In other words, this is the minimum number of inequalities needed to describe P. If P is full- dimensional, then this is precisely the number of facets of P (a facet is a maximal proper face of P). Thinking of γ P as a measure of complexity makes sense from the point of view of optimization: Interior point( methods) can efficiently optimize linear functions over P (to arbitrary accuracy) in time that is polynomial in γ P . ( ) 1.2 Lifts of polytopes Many simple polytopes require a large number of inequalities to describe.
    [Show full text]
  • Regular Polyhedra of Index 2
    REGULAR POLYHEDRA OF INDEX 2 A dissertation presented by Anthony Cutler to The Department of Mathematics In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Mathematics Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts April, 2009 1 REGULAR POLYHEDRA OF INDEX 2 by Anthony Cutler ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Mathematics in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Northeastern University, April 2009 2 We classify all finite regular polyhedra of index 2, as defined in Section 2 herein. The definition requires the polyhedra to be combinatorially flag transitive, but does not require them to have planar or convex faces or vertex-figures, and neither does it require the polyhedra to be orientable. We find there are 10 combinatorially regular polyhedra of index 2 with vertices on one orbit, and 22 infinite families of combinatorially regular polyhedra of index 2 with vertices on two orbits, where polyhedra in the same family differ only in the relative diameters of their vertex orbits. For each such polyhedron, or family of polyhedra, we provide the underlying map, as well as a geometric diagram showing a representative face for each face orbit, and a verification of the polyhedron’s combinatorial regularity. A self-contained completeness proof is given. Exactly five of the polyhedra have planar faces, which is consistent with a previously known result. We conclude by describing a non-Petrie duality relation among regular polyhedra of index 2, and suggest how it can be extended to other combinatorially regular polyhedra.
    [Show full text]
  • Semi-Regular Tilings of the Hyperbolic Plane
    SEMI-REGULAR TILINGS OF THE HYPERBOLIC PLANE BASUDEB DATTA AND SUBHOJOY GUPTA Abstract. A semi-regular tiling of the hyperbolic plane is a tessellation by regular geodesic polygons with the property that each vertex has the same vertex-type, which is a cyclic tuple of integers that determine the number of sides of the polygons surrounding the vertex. We determine combinatorial criteria for the existence, and uniqueness, of a semi-regular tiling with a given vertex-type, and pose some open questions. 1. Introduction A tiling of a surface is a partition into (topological) polygons (the tiles) which are non- overlapping (interiors are disjoint) and such that tiles which touch, do so either at exactly one vertex, or along exactly one common edge. The vertex-type of a vertex v is a cyclic tuple of integers [k1; k2;:::; kd] where d is the degree (or valence) of v, and each ki (for 1 i d) is the number of sides (the size) of the i-th polygon around v, in either clockwise or≤ counter-clockwise≤ order. A semi-regular tiling on a surface of constant curvature (eg., the round sphere, the Euclidean plane or the hyperbolic plane) is one in which each polygon is regular, each edge is a geodesic, and the vertex-type is identical for each vertex (see Figure 1). Two tilings are equivalent if they are combinatorially isomorphic, that is, there is a homeomorphism of the surface to itself that takes vertices, edges and tiles of one tiling to those of the other. In fact, two semi-regular tilings of the hyperbolic plane are equivalent if and only if there is an isometry of the hyperbolic plane that realizes the combinatorial isomorphism between them (see Lemma 2.5).
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:Math/9906062V1 [Math.MG] 10 Jun 1999 Udo Udmna Eerh(Rn 96-01-00166)
    Embedding the graphs of regular tilings and star-honeycombs into the graphs of hypercubes and cubic lattices ∗ Michel DEZA CNRS and Ecole Normale Sup´erieure, Paris, France Mikhail SHTOGRIN Steklov Mathematical Institute, 117966 Moscow GSP-1, Russia Abstract We review the regular tilings of d-sphere, Euclidean d-space, hyperbolic d-space and Coxeter’s regular hyperbolic honeycombs (with infinite or star-shaped cells or vertex figures) with respect of possible embedding, isometric up to a scale, of their skeletons into a m-cube or m-dimensional cubic lattice. In section 2 the last remaining 2-dimensional case is decided: for any odd m ≥ 7, star-honeycombs m m {m, 2 } are embeddable while { 2 ,m} are not (unique case of non-embedding for dimension 2). As a spherical analogue of those honeycombs, we enumerate, in section 3, 36 Riemann surfaces representing all nine regular polyhedra on the sphere. In section 4, non-embeddability of all remaining star-honeycombs (on 3-sphere and hyperbolic 4-space) is proved. In the last section 5, all cases of embedding for dimension d> 2 are identified. Besides hyper-simplices and hyper-octahedra, they are exactly those with bipartite skeleton: hyper-cubes, cubic lattices and 8, 2, 1 tilings of hyperbolic 3-, 4-, 5-space (only two, {4, 3, 5} and {4, 3, 3, 5}, of those 11 have compact both, facets and vertex figures). 1 Introduction arXiv:math/9906062v1 [math.MG] 10 Jun 1999 We say that given tiling (or honeycomb) T has a l1-graph and embeds up to scale λ into m-cube Hm (or, if the graph is infinite, into cubic lattice Zm ), if there exists a mapping f of the vertex-set of the skeleton graph of T into the vertex-set of Hm (or Zm) such that λdT (vi, vj)= ||f(vi), f(vj)||l1 = X |fk(vi) − fk(vj)| for all vertices vi, vj, 1≤k≤m ∗This work was supported by the Volkswagen-Stiftung (RiP-program at Oberwolfach) and Russian fund of fundamental research (grant 96-01-00166).
    [Show full text]
  • Binary Icosahedral Group and 600-Cell
    Article Binary Icosahedral Group and 600-Cell Jihyun Choi and Jae-Hyouk Lee * Department of Mathematics, Ewha Womans University 52, Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03760, Korea; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-2-3277-3346 Received: 10 July 2018; Accepted: 26 July 2018; Published: 7 August 2018 Abstract: In this article, we have an explicit description of the binary isosahedral group as a 600-cell. We introduce a method to construct binary polyhedral groups as a subset of quaternions H via spin map of SO(3). In addition, we show that the binary icosahedral group in H is the set of vertices of a 600-cell by applying the Coxeter–Dynkin diagram of H4. Keywords: binary polyhedral group; icosahedron; dodecahedron; 600-cell MSC: 52B10, 52B11, 52B15 1. Introduction The classification of finite subgroups in SLn(C) derives attention from various research areas in mathematics. Especially when n = 2, it is related to McKay correspondence and ADE singularity theory [1]. The list of finite subgroups of SL2(C) consists of cyclic groups (Zn), binary dihedral groups corresponded to the symmetry group of regular 2n-gons, and binary polyhedral groups related to regular polyhedra. These are related to the classification of regular polyhedrons known as Platonic solids. There are five platonic solids (tetrahedron, cubic, octahedron, dodecahedron, icosahedron), but, as a regular polyhedron and its dual polyhedron are associated with the same symmetry groups, there are only three binary polyhedral groups(binary tetrahedral group 2T, binary octahedral group 2O, binary icosahedral group 2I) related to regular polyhedrons.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Every Face of a Polyhedron Have Many Sides ?
    Can Every Face of a Polyhedron Have Many Sides ? Branko Grünbaum Dedicated to Joe Malkevitch, an old friend and colleague, who was always partial to polyhedra Abstract. The simple question of the title has many different answers, depending on the kinds of faces we are willing to consider, on the types of polyhedra we admit, and on the symmetries we require. Known results and open problems about this topic are presented. The main classes of objects considered here are the following, listed in increasing generality: Faces: convex n-gons, starshaped n-gons, simple n-gons –– for n ≥ 3. Polyhedra (in Euclidean 3-dimensional space): convex polyhedra, starshaped polyhedra, acoptic polyhedra, polyhedra with selfintersections. Symmetry properties of polyhedra P: Isohedron –– all faces of P in one orbit under the group of symmetries of P; monohedron –– all faces of P are mutually congru- ent; ekahedron –– all faces have of P the same number of sides (eka –– Sanskrit for "one"). If the number of sides is k, we shall use (k)-isohedron, (k)-monohedron, and (k)- ekahedron, as appropriate. We shall first describe the results that either can be found in the literature, or ob- tained by slight modifications of these. Then we shall show how two systematic ap- proaches can be used to obtain results that are better –– although in some cases less visu- ally attractive than the old ones. There are many possible combinations of these classes of faces, polyhedra and symmetries, but considerable reductions in their number are possible; we start with one of these, which is well known even if it is hard to give specific references for precisely the assertion of Theorem 1.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tourist Guide to the RCSR
    A tourist guide to the RCSR Some of the sights, curiosities, and little-visited by-ways Michael O'Keeffe, Arizona State University RCSR is a Reticular Chemistry Structure Resource available at http://rcsr.net. It is open every day of the year, 24 hours a day, and admission is free. It consists of data for polyhedra and 2-periodic and 3-periodic structures (nets). Visitors unfamiliar with the resource are urged to read the "about" link first. This guide assumes you have. The guide is designed to draw attention to some of the attractions therein. If they sound particularly attractive please visit them. It can be a nice way to spend a rainy Sunday afternoon. OKH refers to M. O'Keeffe & B. G. Hyde. Crystal Structures I: Patterns and Symmetry. Mineral. Soc. Am. 1966. This is out of print but due as a Dover reprint 2019. POLYHEDRA Read the "about" for hints on how to use the polyhedron data to make accurate drawings of polyhedra using crystal drawing programs such as CrystalMaker (see "links" for that program). Note that they are Cartesian coordinates for (roughly) equal edge. To make the drawing with unit edge set the unit cell edges to all 10 and divide the coordinates given by 10. There seems to be no generally-agreed best embedding for complex polyhedra. It is generally not possible to have equal edge, vertices on a sphere and planar faces. Keywords used in the search include: Simple. Each vertex is trivalent (three edges meet at each vertex) Simplicial. Each face is a triangle.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrie Schemes
    Canad. J. Math. Vol. 57 (4), 2005 pp. 844–870 Petrie Schemes Gordon Williams Abstract. Petrie polygons, especially as they arise in the study of regular polytopes and Coxeter groups, have been studied by geometers and group theorists since the early part of the twentieth century. An open question is the determination of which polyhedra possess Petrie polygons that are simple closed curves. The current work explores combinatorial structures in abstract polytopes, called Petrie schemes, that generalize the notion of a Petrie polygon. It is established that all of the regular convex polytopes and honeycombs in Euclidean spaces, as well as all of the Grunbaum–Dress¨ polyhedra, pos- sess Petrie schemes that are not self-intersecting and thus have Petrie polygons that are simple closed curves. Partial results are obtained for several other classes of less symmetric polytopes. 1 Introduction Historically, polyhedra have been conceived of either as closed surfaces (usually topo- logical spheres) made up of planar polygons joined edge to edge or as solids enclosed by such a surface. In recent times, mathematicians have considered polyhedra to be convex polytopes, simplicial spheres, or combinatorial structures such as abstract polytopes or incidence complexes. A Petrie polygon of a polyhedron is a sequence of edges of the polyhedron where any two consecutive elements of the sequence have a vertex and face in common, but no three consecutive edges share a commonface. For the regular polyhedra, the Petrie polygons form the equatorial skew polygons. Petrie polygons may be defined analogously for polytopes as well. Petrie polygons have been very useful in the study of polyhedra and polytopes, especially regular polytopes.
    [Show full text]